On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Robert E. Blair wrote: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> I have a x86_64 install of 5.1 and on it I have installed a version of >> openoffice from openoffice.org and don't have any pieces of openoffice >> from the 5.1 distribution. This morning it wanted to "update" my >> openoffice 2.4.1 with the distribution 2.3 version. I put an exclude in >> sl-security.repo and sl.repo to tell it not to, but does anyone know why >> it would want to do this? The standard openoffice.org release is rpm >> based so it should know better. >> - -- >> Robert E. Blair, Room E277, Building 362 > > The openoffice in Scientific Linux has an epoch of 1, which that from > openoffice.org has an epoch of 0. > > yum list openoffice\* > > That 1: at the beginning of our openoffice version is the epoch number. > > I don't know why redhat put a 1 on it, but they did. > Back port of edition I think. Basically they went to a newer version, and it was broke so they had to push out an older version.. which requires an EPOCH change. This would have been a while back but once you walk down the path of EPOCH.. forever will it dominate your spec file. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"